The RFU thinks it is just a PR problem!!
Printed From: National League Rugby Discussion Forum
Category: League Rugby - www.leaguerugby.co.uk
Forum Name: Clubhouse chat
Forum Description: For rugby related posts that fit nowhere else.. When you're ready Sandra.
URL: http://www.leaguerugby.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=20592
Printed Date: 31 Jan 2025 at 04:57
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The RFU thinks it is just a PR problem!!
Posted By: Big Eddie
Subject: The RFU thinks it is just a PR problem!!
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 09:34
|
Attending yesterday's Caldy v Nottingham Championship fixture enabled me to chat about the RFU's stance with a number of people way closer to the action than I am. I was somewhat dumbfounded to learn that the executive branch of the RFU really do believe the current schism in the game is down to poor communication by the executive branch and the remedy is within their hands through better PR. It beggars belief..........who an earth do these people think they should be accountable to? Like all second rate politicians they seem to believe they can fool all of the people all of the time! If anyone has real evidence how much money the executive are pi**ing away on fees to management consultants, PR advisors and media bol**cks please do let us know. ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Replies:
Posted By: Bigmalc
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 12:15
|
Spot on - I was at a National 2W game featuring Bristol's Old Reds v Macclesfield. Only the 7 hour round trip for Macc to lose narrowly. Modest crowd and quiet clubhouse. It makes no sense but the RFU don't appear to get it. By contrast the local derby v Clifton was rammed. Let's see what next season brings! ------------- Malc |
Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 12:37
| Even more out of touch than we feared then. |
Posted By: workerbee
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 12:39
| Usually if a team is moved out of its region to balance the leagues then the following season it can revert back as Chester did. But with both teams now being exempt who will be next. Lymm would be the obvious choice but they are in line for promotion to Nat 1, Whilst they will avoid the switch they will have an even bigger travel budget in that league with most teams in London or the south. Why there was no Midlands league in Nat 4 beggars belief which would reduce the traveling and balance the moves from Level 5 from 8 leagues into 4 not 3. But that is too logical for the RFU |
Posted By: Bigmalc
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 13:42
|
Lymm are In a strange position I agree..Fair play to them for performing at the top end of Nat 2 N but at 1 is a step up as Dings from Bristol has discovered . I've not seen Lymm play for some years and must assume that they have access to loan players from Sale? Dings looked pretty good in Nat 2 W last season and have run Nat 1 high flyers Rams close in both their fixtures..I think Dings facilities and catchment area are better than Lymm enjoy and Dings also have access to Bristol academy players . What is needed is some hard information regarding the cost of running sides at this level and the gate receipts likely to be collected. I have no doubt that contributors to this Forum will know more than me but equally likely that the same individuals will understand the position rather better than the RFU ------------- Malc |
Posted By: WILD BOAR 1
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 13:43
Spot on workerbee A bit controversial I know, but I still believe Nat 1 should split North/South, then back to Nat 2 L&se, Mids, North, S&SW, then x8 etc. |
Posted By: Bigmalc
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 13:49
|
I agree Workerbee but Lymms budget in 1 for travelling looks likely to be lower than Macc in Nat 2 W. I understand that things will change next season but there still appears to be plenty of uncertainty. What I don't recall seeing is any comment from the Cornish sides who must incur significant travel costs. ------------- Malc |
Posted By: islander
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 14:18
Yes BE - it is dumbfounding, but also true - as per a Times exclusive last week, the RFU have indeed engaged PR consultants called Teneo, who charge up to £5k per day, to try & steer them through this. In spite of having a well-resourced comms function at Twickenham.
 |
Big Eddie wrote:Posted By: gerg_861
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 14:36
|
Posted By: No 7
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 15:10
|
Huge conflict of interest. ------------- Ambition should be made of sterner stuff. |
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 15:16
|
An SGM is an opportunity for the member clubs to hold the executive's feet to the fire......there should be absolutely no need whatsoever for the executive to hire spin doctors and management consultants when the executive is talking to representatives from the member clubs. The executive is spending money the RFU's money with these spin doctors to save their jobs and their own standing.....it is scandalous. I assume they will try and bury these costs in the accounts so as not to draw attention to them. In my view the schism in the RFU between 99.95% of the clubs and the RFU Executive and the Premiership clubs is completely down to the greedy sense of entitlement displayed by the Executive and the Premiership clubs. If common sense and decency doesn't prevail and the Executive wins through because of the twisted and shameful changes to the constitution which emasculated the Council and concentrates power in the hands of the CEO the game of rugby will be lost ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: cheshire exile
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 16:10
Camborne and Redruth in Nat2W in truth have had an easier travel burden in the last two seasons than historically, with many clubs close to the M5. Chester & Macc have been the real outliers, plus a couple of trips to Leicestershire. Next season Camborne could well make Nat1. It looks like Darlington are headed for the drop but there would still be trips to South Manchester, Yorkshire and East Herts. Pretty crazy.
|
Posted By: Bigmalc
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 16:34
|
Pretty crazy indeed - Camborne will lose that local derby as well,! Prem and Championship should be National then 1 split in 2, 2 in 4 Regional 1 in 8 etc. I'm still a member at Stockport and there have been some cracking home games with a full clubhouse and old rivals. That's what the game is about for many of us. ------------- Malc |
Posted By: Sedge Tiger
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 16:39
|
[QUOTE) Next season Camborne could well make Nat1. It looks like Darlington are headed for the drop but there would still be trips to South Manchester, Yorkshire and East Herts. Pretty crazy. [/QUOTE]
CE Don’t forget the trip to North Manchester too (I hope)   All the best ST ------------- Give him one with handles on |
Posted By: Rabbie Burns
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 16:42
|
Let’s forget splitting Nat 1, this has been done to death and was thrown out before.you cannot have a national league unless it covers the country ------------- So many Christians not enough Lions |
Posted By: cheshire exile
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 16:43
| Apologies, I remember Pirates trips to Park Lane, sometimes fondly. |
Posted By: workerbee
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 17:22
| The difference now is that the RFU no longer pay anything towards travelling which reduced the cost burden of clubs. Add to that the dramatic increase in Petrol/ Diesel the coach costs have risen dramatically. What also makes lengthy coach journeys even more expensive is the requirement to have two drivers . Train travel to London is also becoming very expensive tickets costing £100 for a squad of 30 and the problem of unreliable timetables with trains cancelled at a moments notice. Our club has been caught up in one cancellation requiring the team to be put up over night before returning |
Posted By: islander
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 18:45
see your point Rabbie, but doubt this issue will ever be definitively put to bed. Those who want this will still raise it whenever the opportunity arises, as will those with other hobby-horses eg going back to 16-team divisions, reincarnation of JPS-style national cup etc
|
Posted By: Sedge Tiger
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2025 at 20:16
|
Rabbie Good evening
Yes you are right and I agree hold heartedly with your view. As does SPRUFC. However, there is still a large body of clubs in the North and more specifically Clubs in the London area that would and can see great benefit of leagues based around these areas or in the case of London ‘Historical’ fixtures maybe played on a Friday night in a London National League National means national: Yes without doubt, but that doesn’t necessarily mean commercial viability for clubs. Not a chance. All of the above. Just bring it on. We forget how much of this game is the deeds and conviction of the players. So and again and as especially when you have a governing body that has no vision, leadership and dare I say it, love and passion for the game as a whole. These are dark and dangerous days indeed. I think the RFU mantra is every man or in this case every club for themselves.!!!! Strange days ahead.!! All the best ST ------------- Give him one with handles on |
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2025 at 00:43
|
Getting rid of a National league only effects 14 sides - it is not really a panacea for the game, one way or the other. If we were to lose the National League - and if level 3 was given autonomy to find sponsors for three - or four - divisions, could they find sponsors for those new leagues any easier than finding sponsors for a national league. The big problem is that getting sponsorship for our leagues is not a priority for the marketing team at RF. We saw that when finding a sponsor for the new cups for the "Community" clubs was made a priority, that the RFU found sponsorship. Which tells you that the National leagues are not a priority. The SRU and WRU have found sponsors for their leagues - and even the BBC uses the sponsor's name, So the same would apply to a sponsor for the NCA leagues. ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |
Posted By: JZSmith
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2025 at 12:59
I totally understand your point Eddie but I really don't believe many people can be dumbfounded by their total lack of awareness can they?
|
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2025 at 16:26
I was one such person because in my cynicism I didn't for one minute think that Beaumont, Sweeney and the rest of the Executive Board really considered that the open rebellion (which of course has existed for years but has not been sufficiently well organised) was all down to poor communication and a bit of spin, PR and a glad handing roadshow would get everything back on track. Well blow me down with a feather, from one of the conversations I had with an insider it seemed possible that the Executive may actually believe this total bol**x ........it isn't their actions that everyone is outraged about .......it is just a reaction to how poorly they have put it all across. If the Executive really does believe this they are stupid beyond belief......another view could be that the Executive have picked off 13 or so community clubs to be the beneficiary of a bit of glad handing by the nation's favourite lock forward and this will quell the rebellion ........what planet are they on? ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2025 at 17:06
|
I don't think that they think that at all. But I think that they think they can spin it that way. Most clubs are so busy struggling to survive, so they have not engaged with the rebellion. If they can say, look, we went on a consultation exercise, and after we explained it, only 200 voted against us - they can then spin that as there is nothing to worry about - they can claim the other 1500 or so back them, even if they have abstained or simply sent in blank proxy forms. ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |
Posted By: FHLH
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2025 at 17:35
 ------------- "My father told me big men fall just as quick as little ones, if you put a sword through their hearts." |
Posted By: JZSmith
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2025 at 12:20
The same one as Donald Trump, Elon Musk and a good few of our own politicians who seem to think they can say utterly ludicrous things and be believed? I fear that particular planet is gaining more residents by the day!
|
Posted By: Breakdown
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2025 at 15:53
|
Judging by Mr Sweeney's performance on the 90-minute platform he was given by the Good the Bad and the Rugby podcast, he does think it is about poor communications - and dumped several times on his communications director - who is leaving in May and has already collected her six-figure LTIP so she is OK, don't worry too much about her. Watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARFRgZEcjiM" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARFRgZEcjiM There are plenty of press reports now, but also a summary here of things that may not be mentioned in those press reports. Sweeney said there was one other group of people inside the RFU who were to blame for all the problems and that was....The Board and his Executive Directors! No, of course he didn't, he said that if there was a fault in the structure of the Union, it was the Council and suggested that had to be subject to a significant governance reform. Not the Exec, not the Board who are supposed to keep the Exec in check, but the Council. Some of them, Sweeney said, should be thrown under the bus but not all. He implied the "rebels" were a small group - just the referees being briefed by "a couple" of Championship clubs. He was very proud of his performance and particularly the financial health and stability of the RFU (I am not making this up), but the rebels were making stuff up. The podcast host heaped praise on Wayne Barnes for the factual accuracy of his criticisms of the rebels, but, weirdly, both the host, Alex Payne, and Mr Sweeney forgot to point out that Mr Barnes is a member of the Board that he was defending from criticism. Mr Sweeney referred to dealing with the "disgruntled" and "disaffected" ginger group as getting down into "the swamp and the mud-slinging". So there you have it. He is right. If you disagree, you are wrong and you are a swamp-dweller. Oh yes, there is some unhappiness in the community game, but that is because they don't understand how bright the future is and how he is committed to keeping the same levels of investment (£30m, don't worry about inflation, that doesn't apply to rugby clubs, does it?) over the next few years. And asked to give examples of the game acting in union under his tenure, he offered: the "JV" they are putting together with the Premiership (and CVC) and, er, the Nations Cup. It's worth a listen if you don't value 90 minute of your time as you learn exactly how brilliant Mr Sweeney has been since taking over. ------------- Broken down. Beyond repair. |
Posted By: gerg_861
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2025 at 20:46
|
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2025 at 20:58
|
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/jan/22/under-fire-bill-sweeney-vows-fight-on-rfu-chief-dismissal-bonus-scandal-rugby-union" rel="nofollow - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/jan/22/under-fire-bill-sweeney-vows-fight-on-rfu-chief-dismissal-bonus-scandal-rugby-union ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2025 at 10:30
|
It is clear from yesterday's Times and Telegraph news articles associated with Sweeney's podcast feature that Sweeney isn't for stepping down voluntarily because he believes he is doing a great job and it is others to blame for the unjustified criticism and poor image of him and the RFU. Sweeney points out that he isn't going to step down but if the Board vote to remove him that is a different matter...... ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: JZSmith
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2025 at 12:05
At least if they vote to remove him he won't be able to lead a Trump like march on HQ to override the democratic vote. Well not if a march needs more than one person.
|
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2025 at 12:49
|
There is a PR battle in progress.........my view is that the RFU shouldn't be spending any money defending the CEO in the press just deal with it at the SGM. However for a reasonably objective and balanced view this is how the Independent sees it https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/bill-sweeney-rugby-football-union-england-rugby-b2685621.html" rel="nofollow - Besieged Bill Sweeney battles on – but the RFU is no longer remotely fit for purpose | The Independent ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: rugbychris
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2025 at 14:10
|
The starting point for reform of the RFU has to be splitting the Amateur game and the professional. All income generated from Twickenham is split 50/50 between both. Let the professional game continue to waste millions of pounds of RFU & benefactors cash for little return and let the Amateur game concentrate on building rugby at grassroots level. Rugby investment from RFU.
2015 - Professional rugby - £44.3m - Community Investment - £32.5m 2020 - Professional rugby - £66.4m - Community - £28.3m 2024 - Professional rugby £65.6m - Community - £30.5m |
Posted By: gerg_861
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2025 at 14:22
The RFU shouldn't be wasting a further brass farthing on the professional game. Why are they paying millions a year to PRL 'clubs' to release players that fall flat year after year on the international stage? Two clubs (Gloucester and Newcastle) will get £6.6m this year to have produced zero players for the 6 nations (for England). A terrible waste of money, and wretched negotiation. Pay a release fee per player per match, and give the freed up largesse to the community game to cover travel fees, ground improvements, and insurance fees.
|
Posted By: rugbychris
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2025 at 16:35
|
Just as an FYI 32.5m in 2015 is £44.05m in 2025 according to the BOE inflation calculator. Grassroots is treated with disdain. The massive shortfall in spending is directly attributable to the lack of community coaches, the lack of players participating in clubs around the country and the lack of rugby at schools. Unless we get a grip soon rugby will only be played at elite schools and Universities.
|
Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2025 at 22:31
There are some good players at both clubs, particularly Gloucester - but they don't get picked. Look what happened to Mercer, player of season in top 14, comes back to England and doesn't get selected. Pretty sure if he had gone to Leicester or Quins he would have been. ------------- RAID ON |
Posted By: Breakdown
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2025 at 21:47
Rugbychris, where are your stats from? I don't doubt they are right, but it would be useful to know the source. ------------- Broken down. Beyond repair. |
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2025 at 21:59
|
The Consumer Price Index was set at 100 in 2015. At the end of 2024 it was 133. ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |
Posted By: rugbychris
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2025 at 22:41
| Just from the RFU annual reports. |
Posted By: FHLH
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2025 at 12:54
The key is also understanding what has been included in both headings. A more in depth analysis would be more useful, if available. Sunday afternoons are meant for this.  ------------- "My father told me big men fall just as quick as little ones, if you put a sword through their hearts." |
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 12:41
As ever the devil will be in the detail and though I haven't reviewed the RFU's recently published 2023/24 accounts in detail I have little confidence in any information they disclose in relation to Community Rugby or Rugby Development as they call it. The Profit and Loss account shows the following: Profit before rugby investment £58.2m Professional rugby Investment (£65.6m) Rugby Development Investment (£30.5m) Operating loss (£37.9m) As far as I can see there is no explanation and no notes describing what is in the Rugby Development bucket of £30.5m and its is interesting they call this Rugby Development Investment rather than Community Development Investment. I doubt whether the RFU's auditors have a duty to check (or would be capable of checking) what is in this mysterious £30.5m bucket. This £30.5m could include anything the RFU wants to chuck in to this description and may include a whole load of costs that could well be considered part of the Professional game. I do not believe for one minute that this £30.5m represents 'cash' being provided to the Community Game. For my part I am not interested in any numbers or financial information that represents the RFU's internal allocation of resources as my lack of trust in the RFU Executives is such that I would expect they may significantly pad the supposed Community Rugby investment numbers. Could this £30.5m number also includes a chunk of senior executive's costs, perhaps including a load of King Billy costs? How Bill Sweeney's devotion to the Community Game could be included in the £30.5m bucket. Say 35% of King Billy's time is devoted to thinking, worrying, planning and comprehensively discussing the Community Game. (This is surely a huge underestimate as with 1200 Community Clubs and only 10 Professional clubs one would think the majority of King Billy's focus should be on the Community Game ?) His salary and bonus costs 1,100,000 Employers NIC 148,500 Employers pension say 75,000 Travel and subsistence say 100,000 Share of associated RFU overhead say 250,000 £1,673,500 King Billy's costs allocated to the Community Game at say 35% would be £585,725 of investment in Rugby Development Carry out the same type of allocation across the hundreds of RFU staff and you will soon get close to £30.5m without a single penny going to Community Clubs. It is probably all smoke and mirrors and I for one have so little trust in the RFU that I just don't believe the £30.5m number ....could be closer to £30.5k given how little interest the RFU has in it
------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: rugbychris
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 14:12
| wouldnt surprise me in the least. they are very cagey around investment specifics. |
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 14:44
|
The Board remuneration is a separate line item. We can imply for BS's comments that it includes The insurance premiums that cover loss of earnings for amateur players. While the cover is minimal, it can be vital for those that do need to claim. All payments to referees outside the top two levels. I doubt these have kept pace with inflation. Including all the costs of running the Referees Societies. All the costs of running the CBs and the NCA. The Astroturf pitches - though the roll-out seems to have slowed. Loans and grants for new facilities - though again this is being squeezed. And an ever reducing number of Rugby Development Officers. It would be helpful if those with closer links could put numbers on each of these. The key thing, is that the amount paid to clubs is lower than it was 8 years ago. While the money paid to the professional game has doubled, and of that, more of that goes to the ten Premiership clubs as the funding to Championship clubs has gone down £3 million. ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |
Posted By: Big Eddie
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 15:16
Where the Board remuneration and all other staff costs are shown in the Profit and Loss account is certainly not clear. Although I am a Chartered Accountant is very many years since I produced a set of PLC type accounts. Although there is disclosure in the notes around Board remuneration this note is not referenced against either Cost of Sales or Overheads . I do not think there is anything under the Companies Act or the various accounting standards which would stop the RFU chucking employment costs and other overhead costs into the bucket market Rugby Development Investment. Do I know that such employment and overhead costs are included in the £30.5m bucket labelled Rugby Development Investment costs?......No I do not know. Am I suspicious of the £30.5m Rugby Development Investment number .....Yes I am hugely suspicious of this number because I do not trust the RFU to be clear and transparent on anything. This is how far my trust in the RFU has fallen in recent years and for me this lack of trust started before Bill Sweeney's tenure but it has now completely evaporated ------------- ''The future isn't what it used to be'' |
Posted By: Thatbloke
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 16:36
| Small point maybe but there is NO cover for loss of earnings for amateur players within the RFU Block policy. It is very strictly for insurance against serious injury and is very specific. Loss of Limbs or Neck injuries/paralysis are all that is covered. Important for those who are unfortunate enough to suffer such injury but thankfully few and far between |
Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 30 Jan 2025 at 16:58
|
Thanks ThatBloke - I recalled it being very limited, but it is obviously even less than I remembered. As limited as it is, it is still useful for those it does pay out to. ------------- Sweeney Delenda Est |